Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Using the Marionette Transumbilical Approach Is Safe and Efficient with Careful Patient Selection: A Comparative Analysis with Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

IF 0.8 Q4 SURGERY Surgery Journal Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1055/s-0042-1759772
Amir H Sohail, Jeffrey Silverstein, Hazim Hakmi, Tulio Brasileiro Silva Pacheco, Yousaf B Hadi, Manesh Kumar Gangwani, Muhammad Aziz, Hana Ajouz, David Shin
{"title":"Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Using the Marionette Transumbilical Approach Is Safe and Efficient with Careful Patient Selection: A Comparative Analysis with Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.","authors":"Amir H Sohail,&nbsp;Jeffrey Silverstein,&nbsp;Hazim Hakmi,&nbsp;Tulio Brasileiro Silva Pacheco,&nbsp;Yousaf B Hadi,&nbsp;Manesh Kumar Gangwani,&nbsp;Muhammad Aziz,&nbsp;Hana Ajouz,&nbsp;David Shin","doi":"10.1055/s-0042-1759772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives</b>  The \"marionette technique\" for transumbilical laparoscopic cholecystectomy (m-TLC) offers improved cosmesis and possibly shorter postoperative recovery for patient undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus the four-port conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). We compared the outcomes of m-TLC and CLC at a tertiary care facility in New York. <b>Methods</b>  A retrospective chart review was conducted and data on patients who underwent m-TLC and CLC were retrieved. Hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time, and complications were compared between the two groups using linear and logistic regression, as appropriate. <b>Results</b>  M-TLC group patients were significantly younger, predominantly females with lower body mass index. They were less likely to have previous abdominal surgery and more likely to have noninflammatory pathology ( <i>p</i>  < 0.05 for all). Nonadjusted LOS (1 vs. 3 days, <i>p</i> -value < 0.0001) and operative time (50 vs. 56 minutes, <i>p</i> -value = 0.007) were significantly lower among patients who underwent m-TLC; however, there was no significant difference on multivariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, there was no difference in the overall complication rate (odds ratio: 1.63; 95% confidence interval 0.02-2.39). <b>Conclusion</b>  With careful patient selection, m-TLC offers better cosmesis with comparable safety outcomes. <b>Level of evidence</b>  Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":44614,"journal":{"name":"Surgery Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10085643/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1759772","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives  The "marionette technique" for transumbilical laparoscopic cholecystectomy (m-TLC) offers improved cosmesis and possibly shorter postoperative recovery for patient undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus the four-port conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). We compared the outcomes of m-TLC and CLC at a tertiary care facility in New York. Methods  A retrospective chart review was conducted and data on patients who underwent m-TLC and CLC were retrieved. Hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time, and complications were compared between the two groups using linear and logistic regression, as appropriate. Results  M-TLC group patients were significantly younger, predominantly females with lower body mass index. They were less likely to have previous abdominal surgery and more likely to have noninflammatory pathology ( p  < 0.05 for all). Nonadjusted LOS (1 vs. 3 days, p -value < 0.0001) and operative time (50 vs. 56 minutes, p -value = 0.007) were significantly lower among patients who underwent m-TLC; however, there was no significant difference on multivariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, there was no difference in the overall complication rate (odds ratio: 1.63; 95% confidence interval 0.02-2.39). Conclusion  With careful patient selection, m-TLC offers better cosmesis with comparable safety outcomes. Level of evidence  Level III.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术采用牵线木偶经脐入路是安全有效的,患者选择谨慎:与传统多孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的比较分析。
目的:与四孔传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术(CLC)相比,经脐腹腔镜胆囊切除术(m-TLC)的“牵线木偶技术”为腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者提供了更好的美容和更短的术后恢复时间。我们比较了纽约一家三级医疗机构的m-TLC和CLC的结果。方法回顾性分析行m-TLC和CLC的患者资料。采用线性和逻辑回归对两组患者的住院时间(LOS)、手术时间和并发症进行比较。结果M-TLC组患者明显年轻化,以女性为主,体重指数较低。在接受m-TLC的患者中,既往腹部手术的可能性较低,非炎性病理的可能性较高(p -value p -value = 0.007);但多变量分析差异无统计学意义。在多因素分析中,两组患者的总并发症发生率无差异(优势比:1.63;95%置信区间为0.02-2.39)。结论通过谨慎的患者选择,m-TLC可提供更好的美容效果,且安全性相当。证据等级三级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Surgery Journal
Surgery Journal SURGERY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Pattern of Surgical Diseases Affecting Females in a Teaching Hospital in Central India: A Demographic Study. Isolated Superior Mesenteric Artery Dissection following Blunt Trauma: A Case Report. Reconstruction of Upper and Lower Limb Defects with Medial Sural Artery Perforator Flaps: Is Aesthetics Worth the Effort? A Retrospective Analysis. Delayed Primary Repair of Complex Duodenal Injury Associated to Multiorgan Failure Due to Blunt Abdominal Trauma. Treatment of Aneurysmal Bone Cyst with Endoscopic Resection and Bone Allograft with Platelet-Rich Plasma: A Case Report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1